|
6 months ago ::
Dec 05, 2012 - 9:18AM
#41
|
|
|
eh, personally i think i would just make my own game if i was going to do all of that. which for some might be a more attractive option.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 05, 2012 - 11:36AM
#42
|
Date Joined:
Jul 17, 2003
|
eh, personally i think i would just make my own game if i was going to do all of that. which for some might be a more attractive option.
Well, that is kinda the point... to make it your own game (Something I've already done/am doing... its an ongoing process... once already with my own version of Mage: The Ascension that, apart from the basic task resolution mechanics, has been completely reworked from the ground up).
The fact is that 4E did a LOT of things right when it comes to simulating heroic fantasy stories and those are things I'd gladly crib from in designing a system for a fantasy setting. But there are also...
-Some sacred cows that probably should have been slain, but were retained for tradition's sake (AC, magic item enhancement bonuses)
-Elements that were implemented poorly and patched messily (ex. math fix via feat taxes)
-Excellent elements that were added well after launch (ex. themes, hybrid multiclassing) that could have been worked in a LOT better had they been planned for in advance.
There's enough of those three things that are WORTH doing and other concepts I've had that I feel are worth trying out that making such a system would be worth the effort in my opinion. Really, its something I've already begun via my extensive house rules. The hardest part wouldn't be the math and basic structure, it'd be writing all the fluff and devising appropriate powers for the classes that would likely keep it from ever reaching a publishable point on my end.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 05, 2012 - 12:41PM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2010
|
...or we would also homebrew over 13th Age that is under OGL to make it resemble more like 4th edition (thought a13th age have some awesome mechanical ideas, like how ability score bonus from race and class come into place)
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 05, 2012 - 1:12PM
#44
|
|
|
One could make an OGL clone of 4th? Labyrinth Lord is a clone of BECM which was not open content.
This is a good question. I know that Lab. Lord did change quite a few things from the original so it wasn't a total clone, but it was close enough to be recognizable.
How much of 4e would have to be changed for a clone to escape the restrictions of OGL and other copyright rules?
That needs a lawyer, which means Wotc can use its own lawyers to shut us down if we get larger than a table. We can have the better case, but if we can't pay the legal fees, we lose. If we do anything close enough to 4e to appeal, we exist at Wotc mercy.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 05, 2012 - 2:10PM
#45
|
|
|
I gave up on WOTC when it took them months to get Dark Sun etc into the online builder. I still have all the old offline tools IE the original Character and Monster Builders. This, combined with CBloader means my players and I will be able to completely ignore the horror that is 5e and homebrew our own stuff whenever we wish. I've done a bit of math fixing but other than that I am happy with 4e as is. Now what Chris24601 is proposing actually sounds pretty good and I would most certainly be interested in seeing what happens with something like that. 13th Age has some pretty cool ideas as well. Probably what will happen is I will integrate such things into my home games, fill in some of the gaps with my own homebrew if my players want it (or it gets made for the CBloader) and continue on with that. The biggest thing about 4e's death that will really make me sad is well...losing you guys/the forums. Once Next hits I will have NO reason to come here anymore. I may not be very vocal here BUT I love the 4e community and will be sad to see both Charop, The Edition Wars, and well...just general 4e memes die. Course we can always restart the edition wars. 
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 05, 2012 - 7:47PM
#46
|
|
|
One could make an OGL clone of 4th? Labyrinth Lord is a clone of BECM which was not open content.
Ehhhhhhh, opinions are divided. Nobody has really determined the legal status of OSR clones like LL or OSRIC, etc. Mostly they claim to be OGL games based on modified SRD stuff, though IIRC OSRIC makes no claims at all. Anyway, it is all somewhat dubious, if WotC really wanted to they could drag you back and forth through court for years probably. They obviously see no point in going after OSR type games that are cloning pre-3e D&D, and obviously can't go after OGL 3e/3.5 based stuff. There's a MUCH bigger question about whether they would go after 4e clones. Nobody has tested that, and it never will be tested because nobody is going to sink a dime into such an enterprise when they can be dragged to hell and back. It just isn't worth it. Maybe someday 4e will get cloned like 1e has been cloned, long after the fact when few people care, by a few fans, and then perhaps someone will get bold and make a commercial clone. 1e has been out of print since what, 1989? It took a good 15 years, so expect it around what, 2030, maybe 2025?
I ain't holding my breath.
That is not dead which may eternal lie
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 05, 2012 - 7:57PM
#47
|
|
|
for 4e, you would have to change so much that it probably wouldnt resemble 4e; basically, you couldnt use anything that isnt covered by the old d20 srd. if you want to make new 4e content, you are better off using the 4e srd and gsl, lame as it is. thats what i am doing at least.
Alternately you could abandon the srd angle entirely. Sure that might mean you have to rename some of the more specific elements (call the attributes Might, Stamina, Agility, Intellect, Perception, and Presence) and adjust a few mechanics (use point buy to purchase the ability modifiers instead of ability scores), but it could be done.
Actually, I'd take it as an opportunity to fix some of the things with the system that have been problematic (i.e. a math fix, magic item enhancement bonuses) and kill some of the sacred cows even 4E was unwilling to kill. For example, drop AC entirely for weapon attacks vs. Reflex and then add basic bull rush, grab, and knockdown maneuvers which target Fort and a basic feinting maneuver that targets Will (with actual class powers providing improved versions of these).
You could build in the idea of themes (and hybrid classes) from the start and integrate them more cleanly. For example, perhaps you only choose one at-will attack power from your class, while the other is determined by your choice of theme? Or perhaps your choice of theme improves your basic attack in some fashion (ex. a guardian theme might let you grant an ally a bonus to their defense when you hit with a basic attack).
You could remove the whole class-skills issue (every class instead just gets 4 trained skills of choice) and run with the idea of power source specific powers available to every class with that power source (perhaps with modifiers based on class role).
The point is... I think there could be a real opportunity to create something akin to a 4.5E and have its rules mechanics and presentation be distinct enough that you wouldn't even NEED the GSL to make it work.
Well, that's what convinced me not to go down that road. I know what I would do, and the result would be a fairly deep rewrite that was still a lot like 4e. In other words now I'd be playing a whole different game, so what's the point? If I'm going to make up my own entire game with all its content then I might as well just start from zero and REALLY make my own game. At that point whatever I say next is OT. If OTOH I actually want to play something with my friends that they can buy, then why bother? 4e's flaws are really kinda fairly trivial and 99.9% of it works fine if you play to its strengths. It is just TME to go down the cloning path.
Maybe in 10 years when I'm tired of 4e's foibles and WotC isn't likely to care what I do, then I can make a nice clone, if I feel like it.
That is not dead which may eternal lie
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 05, 2012 - 9:07PM
#48
|
Date Joined:
Sep 29, 2012
|
After I saw the 1st comments about clones, I started thinking about my own novel/comic book/etc., etc. ideas I had planned since I was a kid. If I really had full knowledge of the whole game creation and free time, I'm sure I could create something slightly amazing and mostly original.
Everyone in the world gets inspiration from somewhere and so WotC should take those clones that have been made as a compliment. If they feel like they'll lose business, then maybe they should improve their products and make better business decisions. Suing people just shows their weakness to run a company properly and effectively. Customer complaints in the forums are obviously evidence of that. Most businesses that want to succeed take notes of the competition and strive to do better. Does MTD sue every other company that makes yard products cause they are similar? No, they just make a better product and listen to reviews, complaints, and advice from their customers. If all else fails, there is the buyout option. That's if the person is willing to sell his genius out of greed, but then again he could make a deal to remain in control of his product while all this (whatever) company has to do is advertise, publish, sell, and distribute.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 05, 2012 - 9:47PM
#49
|
Date Joined:
May 16, 2009
|
In my opinion, 4th Edition failed for four major reasons:
1) The online components were broken or took too long to be implemented decently. This really damaged the longterm potential of 4th edition because if there was a well-executed virtual tabletop, the edition could have reached many more newcomers. I personally didn't invest much in 4th Edition because there is no one to play with, and the virtual tabletops available either require too much money or too much work.
2) Brand. The biggest problem with D&D and roleplaying games is that major overhauls are necessary to develop a better game. Unfortunately, there will be people who are fond of a particular edition and stick by it. This is bad in the long run because the fanbase becomes increasingly fragmented with each iteration. I think that if 4th Edition was called a different game, it would have succeeded.
3) Videogames. I am serious, in this age of computer games, there is no better way to introduce people to roleplaying games than by making a good CRPG out of the rules and settings. I became aware of D&D when playing Baldur's Gate II, and Vampire Bloodlines made me interested in other RPGs as well. 4th Edition would have been just about perfect for the DS and PSP, considering how many tactical strategy games are available for those platforms.
4) WOTC. Simply put, the company is terrible at managing D&D, and often shoots itself in the foot. There are too many case studies to explain in detail, but WOTC created Pathfinder by forcing Paizo into an untenable position with the 'Poison Pill' clause.
I am of the opinion that the push for 5th Edition is less about making a quality game and more about trying to appease every generation of D&D fan...which is going to fail terribly, because you can't please everybody.
"The word Live is Evil spelt backwards."
"Flaws are what make our perfections shine so brightly"
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 05, 2012 - 10:20PM
#50
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2010
|
and you can't attract new comers with a badly designed game with the excuse of nostalgia/tradition, because those potential new players don't care for those.
|
|
|
